All posts tagged Imputation Credits

Over this last week I have read so many politically biased responses to Bill Shorten’s proposed strategy to stop the refunds of franking credits that I despaired and I know it is going to be a political football rather than part of comprehensive tax reform. Then I came across a really well explained and positioned argument from Scott Phillips of The Motley Fool fame that takes the politics out of the analysis. I immediately reached out to Scott and asked him could I re-post it for my readers who may be finding the debate confusing or hard to explain to others. So here goes:

Why Bill Shorten is wrong — and right — on dividends

Scott Phillips

What’s that? Bill Shorten has announced a new policy on the refund of franking credits?

I hadn’t noticed.

Okay, that’s not true. I noticed. And, based on feedback on Twitter over the last week, many of you noticed, too.

If Shorten wanted to stir a hornet’s nest, he got just that. Maybe it’s clever politics. Maybe the focus groups told the pollsters this was a smart political strategy.

It sure as heck isn’t good policy, in my view.

Before you fire off an email to either abuse me or suggest I be knighted, let me explain.

I’m going to start with three premises that I think most people can agree on:

The tax system should be fair

You shouldn’t have to pay tax twice on dividend income; and

The tax system, as it stands, is broken.

That last point seems to be Shorten’s main thrust. And it’s a battle cry taken up by many partisans:

“We have a problem, and I have a solution. If you don’t like my solution, you’re saying we don’t have a problem.”

To which I reply:

“We absolutely have a problem. But your solution is a poor one. There are better ways to skin this cat.”

And before we go any further, please leave your political affiliations at the door. This week, on Twitter, I have bagged and praised Labor for different policies. I’ve done the same in the past to the Libs. If you can’t put aside your team jersey and engage in a discussion of ideas, then there’s not much for you in what follows.

But if you’re interested in good policy, read on.

Bill Shorten’s policy, as announced, goes something like this:

“We’re happy for you to reduce your tax using franking credits, but we’re not going to give you a refund.”

There are a few problems with that approach:

First, it implies that if you pay tax, you’re welcome to use the credits to reduce your tax burden to zero.

Second, those credits somehow magically are worthless once you hit zero, meaning that to me they’re worth something, but to a retiree in a 0% tax bracket, they’re worth nothing.

How can franking credits be worth different amounts to different people in different circumstances? Search me… I’m buggered if I know.

And third, and this is what’s stirred up most heat among those who have gone into bat for the policy:

“I pay tax and my taxes shouldn’t go to give a refund/handout to people who already have a lot of money.”

Now, don’t get me wrong. I think the current situation — regarding the ability to pay exactly zero tax on certain income in retirement that might be up to $80,000 — is crackers.

But, Shorten’s policy doesn’t fix that problem. Here’s why:

Consider three people, all of whom have SMSFs in pension phase, and who — according to the current tax rules — pay 0% tax: Banking Betty, Rental Richard and Dividend Davina.

Banking Betty deposits $100,000, and earns $2,000 each year in interest. Betty doesn’t pay any tax.

Rental Richard has a $100,000 property that pays him $2,000 each year in rent. Richard doesn’t pay any tax.

Dividend Davina buys $100,000 worth of shares that earned a profit of $2,000. The company paid tax of $600, so Davina gets $1,400. Davina doesn’t pay any tax.

See the difference here? Because Davina’s investment is in the form of shares in a company, she gets less than the other two. Even though she’s not supposed to pay any tax, the company paid tax, so she gets less.

Under current rules, she’d get the $600 back, delivering on the current government policy of a 0% tax rate, and equalising the return for each of those investors.

Bill Shorten, in effect, is penalising people for owning shares.

Now, let’s address the elephant in the room. Yes, because the company has already paid tax on that $2,000, Davina does officially get a refund. And the optics of that are bad: it looks like somehow the taxpayer is subsidising Davina.

But it’s all a question of cash flows and timing. The ATO just gives Davina back the money the company paid in tax.

And remember, a company is just a legal structure to organise your ownership interest in an asset. Shares in a company aren’t all that different in effect to accounts at a bank. Your bank account is evidence that you have a claim to a share of that bank’s assets, even if you don’t know specifically which notes you deposited.

Imagine a scenario under which Banking Betty’s bank withholds 30% of her interest and sends it to the government as tax. And where Rental Richard’s property manager is obligated to send 30% of his rental income to the ATO.

Both of these investors would have to fill out a tax return and the ATO would send them a refund — because tax was paid on their income, even though the tax rate should have been 0%.

Would Bill Shorten stop Betty and Richard getting their money back?

I doubt it.

But somehow, because Labor has (unfortunately, disingenuously) used extreme examples to make their point, and because they’ve dressed it up as a handout, they’ve mischaracterised the situation.

Somehow Dividend Davina is a fatcat living high on the hog, while Betty and Richard are perfectly entitled to pay no tax.

Essentially, because of the asset class they decide to invest in, our three protagonists are being treated differently.

Sound fair to you?

No, me neither.

Yes, the idea of a ‘refund’ for someone who has paid no tax feels, somehow, deeply wrong. But it’s because tax was paid by the company, on behalf of a shareholder who shouldn’t be paying tax, so the ATO is essentially just righting that wrong.

Here’s where both parties are engaging in a phony war of words. And we’re poorer for it.

Having an essentially uncapped income at a 0% tax rate is madness.

Yes, yes, it’s not technically uncapped, for a host of reasons. So let’s say $80,000 among friends.

You and I pay a decent slug of tax on an $80,000 income. And there’s no reason that a well-off retiree should be able to draw a completely untaxed income of a similar amount, when they likely have a very decent asset base — say a home and a seven-figure superannuation balance.

It’s simply not sustainable, especially as more boomers retire, to have that slice of the economic income pie remain completely untaxed.

But — and this is important — that doesn’t mean we should simply ban franking credit refunds and assume that fixes the problem.

Let’s go back to our alliterative actors, Betty, Richard and Davina.

If Betty was earning $80,000 in interest, should that be untaxed? Should Richard’s $80,000 in rent be untouched by the taxman? Should Davina’s $80,000 in dividends remain completely unscathed?

I don’t think so. But again, it’s not a question of the source of the income; it’s the size.

Under Bill Shorten’s plan, Davina would be worse off, but Betty and Richard laugh all the way to the bank. Does anyone, seriously, think that’s a good basis for a tax plan?

I didn’t think so.

Here’s what I’d do: I’d have a generous tax-free threshold for income from superannuation, maybe $10,000 or so above the pension level. It’s not unreasonable that you’re allowed a little extra, given the sacrifice you made to save for your retirement.

But above that level, I’d implement a progressive tax scale not unlike the one that applies to regular income: The more you earn, the higher your marginal tax rate.

Simple, no?

Fair, yes?

That way, the tax code doesn’t discriminate on the basis of the asset class. There are no free lunches. And the unsustainable tax situation that currently applies to Super is fixed.

So Bill Shorten, and Chris Bowen, it’s time to admit defeat and go back to the drawing board. Feel free to use my template, above.

And Scott Morrison and Malcolm Turnbull, please stop with the emotive and negative language and grandstanding.

Politics should be a battle of ideas, not soundbites The best idea, well explained, should win, regardless of political party or ideological affiliation.

And, ladies and gentlemen of the Parliament, the Australian people will give you bonus points for explaining it clearly and for anything that reduces the complexity of our tax affairs, while ensuring fairness.

Indeed, Turnbull and Morrison’s political forebear, John Howard spoke to the National Press Club in 2014 when he shared the stage with former Labor PM, Bob Hawke. At that event, according to the Sydney Morning Herald , Howard said

“We have sometimes lost the capacity to respect the ability of the Australian people to absorb a detailed argument. They will respond to an argument for change and reform [but] they want two requirements. They want to be satisfied it’s in the national interest, because they have a deep sense of nationalism and patriotism. They also want to be satisfied it’s fundamentally fair.”

I’d like to think that’s still true.

I agree with Bill Shorten’s characterisation of the problem. I disagree completely with his solution.

I imagine I lost the most partisan readers — of both stripes — a few minutes ago. If you’re still reading, thank you for engaging in a discussion of ideas.

I hope I’ve convinced some of you. Of those I haven’t convinced, I hope I’ve at least done a decent job of addressing the issue, without bias, grandstanding or misdirection. Thanks for reading.

At the very least, I hope I’ve productively added to the conversation. It’s the least each of us can do.

I hope this guidance has been helpful and please take the time to comment. Feedback always appreciated. Please reblog, retweet, like on Facebook etc to make sure we get the news out there. As always please contact me if you want to look at your own options. We have offices in Castle Hill and Windsor but can meet clients anywhere in Sydney or via Skype. Just click the Schedule Now button up on the left to find the appointment options.

This information has been prepared without taking account of your objectives, financial situation or needs. Because of this you should, before acting on this information, consider its appropriateness, having regard to your objectives, financial situation and needs. This website provides an overview or summary only and it should not be considered a comprehensive statement on any matter or relied upon as such.

Have you left your financial planning until the last minute? Go over this checklist with your accountant or financial planner as soon as possible. Some of these strategies apply every year, while others are specific to this year because of the changes in the tax rate, the end to the flood levy, and some changes to small business write offs in the next year.

The information in this article is provided for illustrative purposes only and does not take into consideration your personal circumstances. You are encouraged to seek financial advice suitable to your circumstances to avoid a decision that is not appropriate. Any reference to your actual circumstances is coincidental. Genesys and its representatives receive fees and brokerage from the provision of financial advice or placement of financial products.

As a result of the introduction of mean testing of the Private Health Insurance Premium Rebate wewant to alert you to a one-off savings possibility in relation to the private health insurance rebate.

If you pre-pay your 2012/13 private health insurance premium before 30 June 2012, you may still be able to access the Government rebate.

As you may be aware, the Government currently provides a non-means tested rebate for private health insurance premiums. The rebate can be claimed directly from the insurer, or as a tax offset when you lodge your income tax return. the majority of clients claim it upfront and if you don’t then you may need to consider doing so this year.

The rebate is currently 30% for those under 65 and rising from 35% to 40% of the premium depending on the age of the policy holder.

The Government has now passed the required legislation that will apply an income test to the availability of the rebate to any premiums paid on or after 1 July 2012. The more income you earn, the lower the rebate as follows:

Note: The thresholds increase annually, based on growth in Average Weekly Ordinary Time Earnings (AWOTE). Single parents and couples (including de facto couples) are subject to the family tiers. For families with children, the thresholds are increased by $1,500 for each child after the first.

Singles earning $84,000 or less and families earning $168,000 or less will continue to receive the existing 30, 35 and 40 per cent rebate, depending on their age.

Once your ‘adjusted’ income is greater than $130,000 (or $260,000 as a family), no rebate will be available.

For a family with gross premiums of say $2,500, this will result in an increase to the out of pocket premium costs of $750.00

The current rebate applies to a premium ‘paid’ during the income year. Accordingly, it follows that if you prepay your 2012-13 premium on or before 30 June 2012, the current rules should apply and the rebate should be available.

If you are interested in this one-off savings opportunity, we suggest you contact your private health insurer to discuss the possibility of pre-paying next year’s premium and ensure that their is no penalty for prepayment and that their system can cope with the prepayment.

Increase to Medicare Surcharge levy for High Income Earners

For those without Private Health Cover be aware that the Medicare levy surcharge for people without private health insurance will lift to 1.5 per cent of taxable income for those top earners without private health insurance cover. (see table above)

I hope this guidance has been helpful and please take the time to comment. Feedback always appreciated.

The information in this article is provided for illustrative purposes only and does not take into consideration your personal circumstances. You are encouraged to seek financial advice suitable to your circumstances to avoid a decision that is not appropriate. Any reference to your actual circumstances is coincidental. Genesys and its representatives receive fees and brokerage from the provision of financial advice or placement of financial products.

One of the least understood and core benefits of SMSFs are the value of franking credits attached to many blue chip share dividends. You can tilt your portfolio to enhance the taxation benefits to your fund.

Targeting of imputation credits received predominantly from direct share investment in Australian, and to a lesser extent through managed funds is not that difficult. Franking credits (properly known as Imputation credits) can also be used to offset the tax payable on the taxable income of the fund if still in accumulation stage or refunds can be received from the ATO if in pension phase (don’t you just love receiving money from the ATO!)

The key point to understand around franking credits is the fact that the income tax rate for super funds is only 15% in Accumulation phase and 0% in Pension phase, while imputation credits from fully franked dividends can be as high as 30% of the gross dividend of an Australian share. This means that the franking credit covers the tax payable on the dividend received, and leaves a significant excess to be used to reduce the other tax payable by the fund or to be claimed as a refund

So how does it work in reality ?

So company Widget Ltd makes $1.00 profit and therefore is required to pay company tax at the rate of 30% on this $1 profit. Consequently the taxed $0.30 (30% of $1) will be paid in cash to the tax office and the company then records this $0.30 into their franking account. The franking account is only a record of what was paid and does not contain actual money. The company’s ability to frank its dividend will depend on the balance of this franking account. If the franking credit contains a surplus, the company may declare a fully franked (100% franked) dividend. If the franking account isn’t large enough, perhaps because it pays tax overseas, then the company may declare a partially franked dividend. That is, the dividend received by the SMSF is “grossed up” by the amount of the imputation credit to achieve a grossed up dividend. It is on this amount that tax is then assessed at 15% or 05 depending on the phase of your SMSF. The fund is then entitled to a tax offset for the franking credit.

Example: a worked example below of a SMSF that only holds Telstra shares and ANZ shares:

Dividend

Franking Credits

Taxable Income Accumulation Phase

Taxable Income Accumulation Phase

TLS Shares

$1260

$540

$1,800

$1,800

ANZ Shares

$840

$360

$1,200

$1,200

Total

$2100

$900

$3,000

$3,000

Tax @ 15%

$450

Tax @ 0%

$0

Less: Franking credits

$900

$900

Excess Franking credits

$450

$900

In this example, not only will the fund pay no tax on the dividend income of these two shareholdings, but it will have:

Accumulation Phase $450 of excess franking credits

Pension Phase $900 of excess franking credits ;

Which the SMSF Trustees can use to offset against other tax liabilities of the fund (such as other income, capital gains, and taxable contributions) or if none exists, then the SMSF fund can receive a refund of this amount. (Love it!)

The 45 day rule

As the examples have shown fully franked dividends and franking credits make investing in Australian shares a very tax effective strategy. However, the ATO realises this and to prevent investors from abusing the system (called dividend stripping) they introduced the 45 day rule. The 45 day rule states that shareholder must hold shares for 45 days (not counting days of purchase or sale) for any franking credits over $5,000.

Beware of blind dividend chasing , you can hit a wall!

A word of warning before you decide to put your life savings into chasing shares with the highest dividends. While some high yielding dividend stocks may look enticing it would be useless if those shares drop in value (falling capital value). Always research the company and look for strong fundamentals, for example what does the company’s dividend history look like? Are the dividends growing year on year in line with the earnings per share? Is there long term potential for this company? Will earnings rise in the near term and are they sustainable.

Want a Superannuation Review or are you just looking for an adviser that will keep you up to date and provide guidance and tips like in this blog? Then why now contact me at our Castle Hill or Windsor office in Northwest Sydney to arrange a one on one consultation. Just click the Schedule Now button up on the left to find the appointment options. Do it! make 2016 the year to get organised or it will be 2026 before you know it.

Please consider passing on this article to family or friends. Pay it forward!

This information has been prepared without taking account of your objectives, financial situation or needs. Because of this you should, before acting on this information, consider its appropriateness, having regard to your objectives, financial situation and needs. This website provides an overview or summary only and it should not be considered a comprehensive statement on any matter or relied upon as such.

Blog Stats

463,247 hits

Blogroll

Verante Financial Knowledge Centre
We understand that the financial industry is full of jargon and concepts that can be difficult for people to get their head around or remember. So to learn more about money and finance at our Financial Knowledge Centre is a great place to start.

Company website

Verante Financial Knowledge Centre
We understand that the financial industry is full of jargon and concepts that can be difficult for people to get their head around or remember. So to learn more about money and finance at our Financial Knowledge Centre is a great place to start.

Government website

Industry Website

Newsletter

Verante Financial Knowledge Centre
We understand that the financial industry is full of jargon and concepts that can be difficult for people to get their head around or remember. So to learn more about money and finance at our Financial Knowledge Centre is a great place to start.